Jharkhand High Court
Sushma Kumari vs The State Of Jharkhand on 17 August, 2023
1 Cr.M.P. No.50 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr.M.P. No. 50 of 2021
Sushma Kumari, w/o Rampratap Singh, aged about 51 years, r/o
Katras, P.O. & P.S.- Katrasgarh, Dist. Dhanbad
.... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Harendra Das, s/o late Shivnath Das, r/o Ramkanali, Near Filter
Plant, Ratu, P.O. Katras, P.S. Ramkanali, O.P. Katras, Dist.
Dhanbad
.... Opp. Parties
PRESENT
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
.....
For the Petitioner : Mr. Lukesh Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Addl. P.P.
For O.P. No.2 : None
.....
By the Court:-
1. Heard the parties.
2. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the
jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer
for quashing the entire criminal proceeding arising out of
Complaint Case No.3007 of 2017 (SC/ST Case No.207 of 2018),
including the order dated 17.12.2019 passed by learned Additional
Sessions Judge VI-cum-Spl. Judge SC/ST, Dhanbad whereby and
where under, the learned Additional Sessions Judge VI-cum-Spl.
Judge SC/ST, Dhanbad has taken cognizance for the offences
punishable under Sections 323 and 341 of Indian Penal Code and
under Section 3 (1) (s) of Schedule Casts & Schedule Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act,1989 against the petitioner.
3. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner being
the officer-in-charge of police station assaulted the complainant,
caused hurt to him and wrongfully restrained him. It is also
alleged that she abused the complainant by saying sala chamar.
4. The learned Special Judge after considering the complaint,
statement on solemn affirmation of the complainant and the
statement of inquiry witnesses have found prima facie material
against the petitioner to proceed against him for having
committed the offence punishable under Sections 323 and 341 of
Indian Penal Code and under Section 3 (1) (s) of Schedule Casts &
Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
5. No one turns up on behalf of the opposite party no.2 in-spite of
repeated calls.
6. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that
there is no averment in the complaint or in the statement on
solemn affirmation of the complainant or the inquiry witnesses
either to the effect that the petitioner is not a member of schedule
tribe or schedule caste or the complainant is a member of schedule
caste or schedule tribe and in the absence of essential ingredient to
constitute the offence under the penal provision of Schedule Casts
and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, the offence
punishable under Section 3 (1) (s) of the said Act is not made out.
In this connection, learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon
the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of
Gorige Pentaiah vs. State of Andhra Pradesh reported in (2008)
12 SCC 531. It is next submitted by the learned counsel for the
petitioner that this complaint has been filed for wreaking
vengeance. Hence, it is submitted that entire criminal proceeding
arising out of Complaint Case No.3007 of 2017 (SC/ST Case
No.207 of 2018), including the order dated 17.12.2019 passed by
learned Additional Sessions Judge VI-cum-Spl. Judge SC/ST,
Dhanbad be quashed and set aside.
7. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor on the other hand
vehemently opposes the prayer for quashing the entire criminal
proceeding arising out of Complaint Case No.3007 of 2017 (SC/ST
Case No.207 of 2018), including the order dated 17.12.2019 passed
by learned Additional Sessions Judge VI-cum-Spl. Judge SC/ST,
Dhanbad and submits that there is direct and specific allegation
against the petitioner of committing the offence punishable under
sections 323 and 341 of Indian Penal Code. Hence, it is submitted
that this criminal miscellaneous petition being without any merit
is dismissed.
8. Having heard the submissions made at the Bar and after going
through the materials in the record, this Court is of the considered
opinion that there is absolutely no averment in the complaint,
statement on solemn affirmation of the complainant to suggest
either that the petitioner is not a member of schedule castes or
schedule tribes or that the complainant is a member of schedule
caste or schedule tribe.
9. Under such circumstances, this Court is of the considered view
that the learned Special Judge has committed gross illegality for
taking cognizance for the offence punishable under Section 3 (1)
(s) of Schedule Casts & Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)
Act, 1989. Accordingly, the portion of the order dated 17.12.2019 is
quashed and set aside; so far as the same relates to the offence
punishable under Section 3 (1) (s) of Schedule Casts & Schedule
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 qua the petitioner only.
10. So far as the offence punishable under Section 323 and 341 of
Indian Penal Code is concerned, there is direct and specific
allegation against the petitioner of having committed the said
offences and in the considered opinion of this Court, there is no
illegality in the order dated 17.12.2019 passed by the learned
Special Judge taking the cognizance in respect of the said offences.
Accordingly, the same is not interfered with by this Court.
11. In the result, this criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed to
the aforesaid extent only.
12. In view of the disposal of this criminal miscellaneous petition,
interlocutory application, if any, is dismissed being infructuous.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi
Dated the 17th August, 2023
AFR/Sonu-Gunjan/-
